Agenda

The project's Antitrust Policy is linked from the LF and project websites. The policy is important when multiple companies, including potential industry competitors, are participating in meetings. Please review it, and if you have any questions, please contact your company’s legal counsel. Members of the LF may contact Andrew Updegrove at the firm Gesmer Updegrove LLP, which provides legal counsel to the LF.

• Consent Info API - https://github.com/camaraproject/ConsentInfo

  • https://github.com/camaraproject/ConsentInfo/pull/4

  • https://github.com/camaraproject/ConsentInfo/pull/5

• ICM - https://github.com/camaraproject/IdentityAndConsentManagement

  • TO BE CLOSED - https://github.com/camaraproject/IdentityAndConsentManagement/issues/278

    + #224, #266 and #271 are now closed as requested. We can resolve this issue #278 as well.

  • NEW - https://github.com/camaraproject/IdentityAndConsentManagement/issues/279

    + To be fixed by #280

  • NEW - https://github.com/camaraproject/IdentityAndConsentManagement/issues/282

  • NEW - https://github.com/camaraproject/IdentityAndConsentManagement/issues/283

  • https://github.com/camaraproject/IdentityAndConsentManagement/issues/275

    + The first issues/PRs for the scope of the Fall25 meta-release are already proposed. They are labelled with `fall25` and added to the ICM Fall25 milestone

  • https://github.com/camaraproject/IdentityAndConsentManagement/issues/258

    + https://github.com/camaraproject/IdentityAndConsentManagement/pull/268

Minutes

Please note that normally @Axel Nennker moderates ICM meetings, but as he was unable to attend and did not give prior notice, @Jesús Peña García-Oliva kindly stepped in as moderator to review the major updates to the Consent Info API and ICM repositories according to the agenda above.

Consent Info API - https://github.com/camaraproject/ConsentInfo

• A new Consent Info repository was approved and created, moving related work from the ICM repository (Thanks @Herbert Damker!!).

• Legacy ICM issues and pull requests #224, #266 and #271 are now closed as part of this migration. We can resolve ICM issue #278 as well.

• Two pull requests were highlighted:

  • #4 to include the initial API specification (the same proposal as previously discussed in ICM). It was agreed to merge the initial API spec as a draft, and deal with further improvements or discussions in separate, dedicated issues (confirmed with Subhash from Ericsson who commented in the PR). Therefore PR #4 just need a code owner approval to be merged. @Jesús Peña García-Oliva will add a comment to the PR indicating this.

  • #5 to add Linting rules (copied from the CAMARA Commonalities). It should be very straightforward, as these are the same linting rules defined by Commonalities and applied to all API repositories.

• Repository ownership and maintenance remain with the current ICM working group, subject to future review if needed.

ICM - https://github.com/camaraproject/IdentityAndConsentManagement

• New issues were raised regarding:

  • #279 To update CAMARA-API-access-and-user-consent.md, mainly replacing outdated terms (e.g., “API invoker” to “API consumer”) and removing the term “Telco.” A corresponding pull request (#280) addresses these changes. The WG is asked to review this.

  • #282 The potential use of an ID token hint for user identification.

  • #283 Claims in signed authentication requests for Auth code flow to define mandatory JWT claims (such as iss, aud, iat, exp, jti) and to set maximum lifetime restrictions for assertions.

• #275 The scope for the upcoming meta-release (labelled "fall25") has been initiated with a dedicated milestone. Input on high priority topics is encouraged before the milestone deadline. Other topics will be left out of the scope of the next meta release discussions in the WG backlog. @Jesús Peña García-Oliva has already proposed the first issues/PRs for the scope of the Fall25 meta-release.

• #258 & #268 For the CIBA privacy topic, it was proposed to simplify the CIBA flow by directly referencing the relevant standard sections, avoiding extra technical definitions that might lead to misinterpretation. The WG is expected to accept this approach, as has been done in the past for the Auth Code Flow Diagram and Flow Description.

Next meeting

Wednesday, April 09 . 04:00 - 05:00PM (CEST)